As discussed last week, several reports have shown in the last year or two that carbon dioxide (CO2) does not significantly affect global temperatures, contrary to endless repetitions to
the contrary by climate alarmists and the mainstream press.
Not exact matches
The problem with the oft - proposed carbon tax is that pollution would not be reduced because carbon dioxide CO2 is not a pollutant despite the endless propaganda
by climate alarmists to the
contrary.
Contrary to Stewart's claim that the world was united
by scientific evidence in the early 1990s, even
by 1995, there was still only the «suggestion», on the «balance of evidence», that there had been a «discernible human influence on global
climate» — and that's in the Summary for Policymakers document, which has consistently been far more
alarmist than the more technical parts of the report.
By the way, does anyone out there still believe that the Climate Commission isn't just a mouthpiece for trumpeting Labor government policy, staffed as it is by a team of alarmists with not one single person in the clique to challenge the orthodoxy or put a contrary vie
By the way, does anyone out there still believe that the
Climate Commission isn't just a mouthpiece for trumpeting Labor government policy, staffed as it is
by a team of alarmists with not one single person in the clique to challenge the orthodoxy or put a contrary vie
by a team of
alarmists with not one single person in the clique to challenge the orthodoxy or put a
contrary view?
What it means
Contrary to what many
climate alarmists have long contended, there is mounting evidence that suggests that the negative consequences they predict for the world's marine life in a future high - CO2 world are
by no means assured, nor are they likely to be widespread.